Be The Camshaft Expert

We'll show
Written by David Vizard on June 14, 2006Contributors: Johnny Hunkins, David Vizard
you how, but you'll need to leave those old myths at the door.

View All 39 Photos

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

FACEBOOKTWITTERGOOGLE+EMAIL

The most meaningful statement you can make about power production is that it
all starts with cylinder heads that can flow large quantities of air. But having the
greatest flowing heads counts for zero if the valves are not opened sufficiently
or at the right time in relation to the crankshaft's rotation, and that very important
function falls to the camshaft.

The problem is, if you are something of a novice at this engine business, just
about everything to do with cams and valvetrains looks complex, and the truth
is, it's that and more. If cam and valvetrain design at the top level is in your
future, you had better thinkin terms of a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering. OK,
so most of you are not looking to do that, but would like to understand cams and
valvetrains sufficiently to make truly informed power-generating decisions.
Being able to do so can easily mean choosing a cam for a typical street/strip
small-block that will make 20-30 lb-ft and 20-30 hp more than your buddy who
bought a generic grind out of a catalog solely on the basis of duration. (If it's
bigger, it must be better, right?) If that 20-30 extra lb-ft and hp are important to
you, then what you are about to read will give you the knowledge you need to
get it.

Basics
The lowest denominators for a power-producing valvetrain are the lift and
duration delivered to the valves. Like most statements that appear to sum things
up elegantly in just a few words, this is a gross simplification, but we have to
start somewhere. First, duration. This is the number of degrees the valve
spends off the seat, or the degrees the lifter is above a specified lift. In catalogs,
two numbers are commonly quoted. These come under the heading of
advertised duration and duration at 0.050 inch (50 thousandths). The first of
these is usually measured, for a hydraulic cam, at 0.006 inches and, for a solid
cam, 0.020 inches (6 or 20 thousandths) of cam follower lift, while the second is
at 0.050 inches (50 thousandths). A third duration figure, which is often
confused with the advertised duration, is the duration at the lash point or, as it is
also called, "off-the-seat" duration. Assuming a totally rigid valvetrain, the
engine sees the last of these three.

Because the valve lash operates through a step-up rocker ratio, the lash
between a solid lifter and the cam is usually smaller than the 0.020 inches used
for the advertised duration, so the duration at the lash point is often longer by
some 6-12 degrees. The exception here is that some of the older solid designs
were designed to run 0.28-.030 inches lash. With this valve lash and the
commonly used 1.5:1 ratio rocker, the lash point at the lifter was 0.020 inch--the
same as the lifter rise used for quoting duration. This meant advertised duration
and duration at the valve lash point were the same. At the other end of the
scale, a modern tight-lash solid can be as much as 14 degrees longer than the
advertised duration. For a hydraulic cam, lifter collapse is assumed to be about
0.006 inch, so the advertised duration is about the same as the duration at the
valve. This makes duration comparisons between hydraulic cams much more
realistic than between solids.

Now that we have defined the cam lobe's duration and lift, we can move on to
looking at the cam's collective attributes; that is, the intake's relationship with
the exhaust. The point here is that the engine's output will be optimized when
the valves are open and closed at certain points in relation to the crank's
rotation. To be able to specify what you want to your cam grinder, you need to
understand the terminology involved. The cam attributes diagram shows what
you need to know.

What dictates the cam's success in the quest for maximum area under the
output curve along with highest peak torque and horsepower is not (as is so
often assumed) the duration involved. The most important factor is actually the
overlap and the Lobe Centerline Angle, often referred to as the LCA. I realize
this may fly in the face of everything you have been told or have read before,
but it's not that hard to see it must be so. Let's do one of those mental
experiments to establish overlap as a highly influential criteria. First, and of
prime importance to a street-driven performance machine, is manifold vacuum.
Let's be clear that we are talking V-8s and single-plane manifolds here. As far
as idle quality and vacuum are concerned, it degrades rapidly with increasing
overlap. The reason it does so stems from the fact that a V-8 has an induction
phase every 90 degrees. This means that when one piston is moving rapidly on
its induction stroke (about 90 degrees down the bore) there is another piston
stationary at the top of its stroke with the valves in the overlap position, i.e. both
open.
With a typical 280-degree hydraulic cam, the valves (in the TDC overlap
position) will be a little over an eighth inch off the seat. This means the piston
moving rapidly down the bore in the middle of its induction stroke can draw
through the intake manifold and right on through the overlapping valves to that
cylinder's exhaust. The area it has to accomplish this in a typical V-8 is about
equal to a 15/16-inch-diameter hole. On the other hand, the through-flow area
via the carb's butterflies is only equal to a hole about 5/16 to 3/8 inch. It's not
hard to see that, even in the case of a cam of only about 280 degrees with 64
degrees of overlap, the overlap acts like an unwanted hole nearly an inch in
diameter in the intake manifold.

OK, so overlap, or at least too much of it, is not good for a street-driven engine.
But let's not overlook that the actual amount of overlap is not the sole issue
toward killing vacuum. If we replace the open plenum intake with a two-plane
(180 degree) intake, in one fell swoop, we space out the induction pulses seen
in each half of the manifold to 180 degrees instead of 90. This means there is
no time when the one cylinder's intake can draw through the exhaust of
another. As a result, the intake vacuum goes up by something in the order of 50
percent.

Overlap: How Much Is Too Much?

Assuming we are choosing a cam for a streetable engine, how much overlap
can we use before it becomes a problem? The answer here is that it depends
on the valve sizes in relation to the cylinder displacement. If the heads have
small valves in relation to cylinder cubes, then the amount of overlap we can
use is significantly more than the same cylinder with much larger valves. For
instance, a 500-inch big-block Chevy can tolerate not only more overlap, but a
much bigger cam because the cylinder heads are so under-valved for the
displacement. A 350 small-block with a set of decent heads has a lot more
valve-per-cube, so it does not need so much overlap to get the job done.
Now that we have covered the effect overlap has on street manners, it is time to
look at its effect on power output. Let's make one thing clear here: Big (but not
excessive) overlap is a prime key to big power numbers, but only if your
exhaust system sucks. Literally. If you have ever heard that an engine needs a
little backpressure, you might want to ask yourself why an engine would want
an exhaust system that literally pushes exhaust back into the combustion
chamber rather than sucking it out. The simple answer is, it doesn't. If a big-
overlap, big-cammed engine has an exhaust system with any measurable
backpressure, the price paid is a big drop in output.

Although the foregoing might be interesting info, it doesn't actually help you
make a decision as to how much overlap your engine needs. Just in case you
might ask, I use a one-off computer program that was 18 years in the making to
do what we are doing here, but that is no help to you. So that you have
something of a guide, I have made up the nearby chart. To make the most of
this chart, you will need to take into account where, in terms of valve size per
cube, your engine falls. For, say, a 302-inch engine with decent-sized valves,
the overlap selected needs to be toward the short end (left side) of the segment
that fits your application. If it's a typical 350-inch small-block, then choose
something around the middle of the relevant segment. If the engine in question
is a big-block or a really big-inch small-block (both of which are typically under-
valved), then select the overlap toward the larger, righthand side of the relevant
segment.

LCA Selection
With an overlap figure decided on, the next step is to determine the LCA. If
maximum torque and power along with the biggest area under the curve is the
target, then only one LCA will do the job, and it has to be the one the engine
wants, not one you or someone else doing your guessing for you arbitrarily
decides is the one needed.
To understand where I am going, let's take a look at a typical cam-buying
scenario. A hot rodder calls up and asks for a hydraulic cam of, say, 290
degrees for his 350 small-block street driver. Now this is a fairly big cam and
could involve a lot of overlap, possibly even too much for the application. What
usually happens is the cam tech guy, recognizing that this cam may not be as
well-mannered as the customer would like, recommends the cam be ground on
a wider-than-optimal LCA. Widening the LCA reduces the overlap and
tightening it increases overlap. To maintain sufficient idle and vacuum qualities,
the cam tech recommends the cam be ground on, say, 112-degree LCA, which
gives an overlap of 66 degrees. For a typical performance-headed 350, the
optimal LCA is usually 108 degrees. Grinding the 290-degree cam, our guy is
calling for on a 108 LCA results in 74 degrees of overlap. At first this does not
sound like too much more, but the reality is it's the area of the overlap triangle
that influences the situation, and the through-flow area of the overlap triangle
goes up just about as the square of the overlap angle. This makes the 74-
degree overlap a 26 percent increase, not the 12 percent you might have
expected.

So spreading the LCA is a way of cutting the overlap while still retaining the
duration. Unfortunately, nothing comes without a price. The downside of
spreading the LCA to reduce overlap so a decent idle and vacuum are achieved
has two major strikes against it. First, the piston comes further up the bore
before the intake valve closes. At low speed this pushes the intake charge back
into the intake manifold. Result: low-speed torque is reduced. But so long as it
drives well, this may be OK if it helps top-end output. Let's investigate that. In-
cylinder pressure measurements strongly indicate that there is an optimal
balance between early opening of the intake (IOBTDC) and late closing
(ICABDC). If the LCA is spread solely to preserve the idle and vacuum, the
intake now not only opens too late, but also closes too late. Mapping intake,
cylinder and exhaust pressures throughout the cycle indicates that getting the
first half of the induction stroke right is of paramount importance toward making
the second half optimal. In other words, if the first half of the stroke is not
optimal, there are no means of redemption on the second half.

This forces us to the conclusion that for a given duration, there is only one
optimal opening point and one closing. This, in turn, means, within a small
window, only one LCA gives optimal results. If the LCA is spread to preserve
the idle and vacuum, the price paid is reduced torque and hp. We should have
gone to a shorter cam on the correct LCA, as it would have produced better
results! The moral here is that if the cam had been selected on the basis of
overlap and LCA first, then the duration would have been decided by these two
factors, not some arbitrary decision on the part of the hot rodder. To arrive at
the duration when the overlap and LCA are known, we take the overlap (in our
example 66), divide by 2, add it to the LCA (108 + 33), then double it (141 x 2 =
282). That's the duration needed to satisfy the overlap and LCA requirements,
and I will bet arriving at the required cam this way is a whole lot different (and
far more accurate) than you have been told in the past.

How Do You Know What LCA Is Needed?

Now we come to what would normally be a real stumbling block. Exactly what
LCA does an engine need for optimal results? The bottom line is that it's all
related to how big a cylinder the intake valve has to feed. The bigger the
cylinder in relation to the valve, the tighter the LCA needs to be, and vice versa.
That is the main factor. Additionally, but to a lesser extent, we also find that as
the compression ratio goes up, the optimal LCA gets wider. This is good
because it means smaller valve cutouts in the pistons. For an engine in the 9 to
11:1 CR range, the LCA selection chart will, 99 times out of 100, deliver
accurate results. For each ratio above 11:1, it pays to spread the LCA about 1
degree for every two ratios of compression increase.

Duration & Lift: Its Effect On Output

Now that we are over the duration hurdle and can look at it in a more realistic
fashion, let's look at exactly what it delivers. Assuming the compression ratio
remains constant, longer duration just moves the torque curve up the rpm
range. Peak torque itself usually only increases a minor amount. The additional
hp comes from the fact that the torque delivered happens at a higher rpm and
power is directly proportional to torque times rpm. The graph of duration versus
output shows what typically happens as the duration increases while all other
factors are held constant. Although it looks like a good before-and-after test
showing the longer cam's value, this test does in fact favor the shorter cam.
Because the intake valve closes sooner after passing BDC, the running ratio, or
dynamic compression ratio, with a shorter cam is higher. If the compression
ratio with the longer cam is raised so that the same cranking pressure as the
shorter cam is seen, we find that much of the low-speed torque loss is
recovered. In addition to this, the longer cam will deliver a much better top end
when an appropriate compression increase is made. This is an important factor,
so don't overlook it. If you don't feel inclined to run a compression to match a
longer cam's requirement, then stick with a shorter one, as it will produce better
results.

For most V-8s with reasonable heads, the ability to raise low-speed torque with
compression increases holds good to about 285-290 degrees (at lash point) of
cam duration. After that, low-speed torque will drop off faster than further
compression increases can recover it. A cylinder's breathing ability is not only
dependent on the duration of valve opening, but also the amount of valve lift
involved. The type of heads typically used on domestic V-8s are much more
responsive to lift than, say, a four-valve engine.

There are two reasons for this. The first is that all two-valve V-8s are under-
valved for the cubes those valves have to feed. Secondly, heads with a
predominantly parallel valve design go through three phases of flow efficiency.
The first, right off the seat, is a high-efficiency regime. As the valve lifts through
the 0.100 inch (100 thousandths) to about 0.500 inch (500 thousandths),
efficiency drops off considerably. Once the valve lift goes over a point equal to a
lift of about a quarter of the valve's diameter, the flow efficiency starts to pick
back up. The reason for this is that intake valve's shrouding starts to diminish
because the valve is sufficiently far enough out of the seat's sphere of influence.
For this reason, most of the V-8s we work with will benefit from valve-lift values
equal to about 0.3 to 0.35 times the diameter of the intake valve. For a typical
2.02-inch intake, this would mean a lift of at least 0.6 inch (600 thousandths) to
as much as 0.7 inch (700 thousandths). Achieving this with a short cam is
something of a challenge, so going for all the lift possible consistent with
reliability is worthwhile.

While doing a bunch of cam testing for Harvey Crane some years ago, I ran a
test to get some kind of idea of the relative importance of duration versus lift.
The results were interesting, as the nearby graph shows. The hydraulic flat-
tappet cams used were 252 and 260 degrees duration. With a 1.5 rocker, the
260 cam delivered 0.44 (440 thousandths) lift while the 252 cam with a 1.7
rocker went to 0.48 (480 thousandths) lift. The intake valve lift at TDC was
0.070 for the 252 cam, and for the 260 cam and 1.5 ratio rocker, 0.073 (73
thousandths). As can be seen from the results, the peak power output from
each combination was near identical, but the shorter-duration, high-lift combo
made power at less rpm because it produced more torque, especially at low
speed.

Lifters
Now that we have worked our way through what an engine would like in terms
of optimal valve events, we can move on to look at the hardware choices open
to us to achieve such. The first component on our list is lifters. Our options are
covered by four types of lifters, also know as tappets. These can be had in
either flat or roller form, and each of these comes in a hydraulic or solid design.
A flat lifter is, in reality, not flat on its working face, and would quickly fail if it
was. The lifter's face is actually crowned with a 60- to 100-inch radius. The cam
lobe itself is tapered. This, in conjunction with an offset of the lifter over the cam
lobe, causes the lifter to rotate. This means it is not a simple rubbing action
between lifter and lobe, but a semirolling motion. Without the correct rotation,
the lifter will have a short life. The contact patch between the cam form and lifter
is one of the highest-stressed areas in an engine. If heavy springs are going to
be installed, it pays to use armor-faced lifters such as those sold by COMP
Cams. Flat lifters are inexpensive and they can get the valve off the seat really
fast. What they don't do quite as well as a roller is build lifter velocity or deal
with super heavy springs. The amount of velocity that can be imparted to a flat
lifter is dependant on the lifter diameter. The wider it is, the faster it travels.
Because a flat lifter can initially accelerate faster than a roller, we find that with
cams under about 270 to 278 degrees of off-the-seat duration, a flat tappet can
produce as much or more area under the curve. It also used to be claimed that
a flat lifter design was substantially inferior to a roller lifter in the friction
department. Though this was, to an extent, correct 20 years ago, we find that
new super oils have eaten substantially into whatever friction reduction
advantage the roller may have had over a flat lifter.

If maximizing output is the goal and the budget extends to the higher price of a
roller lifter cam, then, for anything over about 275 degrees, the roller is
potentially a superior power producer. Where it scores is the velocity it can
impart to the lifter is higher than a flat lifter. If it has enough duration to get up to
speed, then the lifter can be pushed higher. As we have already seen, valve lift
with a two-valve engine is an important factor, and a roller can deliver in this
area.

Once a flat or roller lifter decision has been made, the next question is, solid or
hydraulic? Of the two, hydraulic is the most popular for street use as it is quiet
and virtually service-free. The hydraulic innards adjust the working length of the
lifter such that it takes out all the lash and no more.

You may have heard the term "anti-pump-up lifters." These are intended to fix a
problem that can occur toward the top 25 percent of the engine's rpm range.
What happens is that the spring starts to lose full control of the valvetrain and
separation between various components takes place. This, as far as the lifter is
concerned, looks like lash, so the lifter does it's job and takes it up. When the
valve now tries to close, the lifter, which is now a little too long, holds the valve
off its seat and heavy-duty power loss takes place. For many years, the
accepted fix for this was an anti-pump-up lifter, which was a much leakier,
faster-collapsing lifter that allowed the valve to physically close unimpeded. But
it also collapses easier and consequently cuts valve lift. The real fix is a spring
with better control. That's a serious topic we will talk about later.If valvetrain
noise is of little or no concern, then a solid cam is the way to go, as there are no
worries about hydraulic lifter collapse.

Before moving on to pushrods, some vital info about flat-lifter cams could save
you a lot of hassle. Because the surface loading is so high, flat lifters require a
break-in procedure that needs to be carried out conscientiously. Never re-use
lifters; always use new ones. When installing, generously lube the cam profiles
and the lifter faces with the special cam lube supplied with the cam. Make sure
the lifters rotate freely.

On start-up, idle the engine at 2,000 rpm for 20 minutes. Do not allow the
engine to idle slowly until initial break-in is completed. When very aggressive
race profiles are used, the break-in should be done on lighter springs or with
low-lift break-in rockers.

Pushrods
A pushrod looks like a simple item. Just make it stiff and light and you are home
dry, or at least it would seem so. Sure, low weight and stiffness are key
ingredients, but there is another important factor related to pushrod
manufacture. Its ability to suppress vibrations. If it can do well here, it acts as a
simple damper between the lifter and rocker, rather than a spring. The modern
aftermarket pushrod has countless hours of spin-testing to optimize the balance
between low mass, stiffness and damping. Doing so ensures a more optimal
valve motion. This ultimately translates into additional output. Because a
pushrod can influence the valve's motion from as low as the middle of the speed
range, additional output can be seen from there on up if it is canceling spurious
motion at the valve. Since it is difficult to know for sure that your valve springs
are dynamically perfectly behaved, it pays to use a good aftermarket pushrod
as a little insurance. But there is more to buying pushrods than just shelling out
for a good brand.

When changes to the valvetrain are made and maybe the block and heads have
been milled, we can find that the pushrod/rocker/valve stem geometry with a
stock length pushrod is anything but correct. The technique here is to use an
adjustable pushrod and adjust its length until the roller or rocker tip sweeps out
a patch that is centralized on the valve stem. Also, with high lobe lift cams, you
should check that the ball end of the pushrod is not moving through an arc
larger than the ball will accommodate. If it does, than check your cam supplier's
catalog as there are pushrods with tips to allow greater angularity.

Rockers
Rockers not only operate the valves, but they are also extremely useful as a
valvetrain tuning aid. Most of the V-8s we deal with have stamped-steel rockers.
These are cheap, but if used for lifting the valves much more than about 0.500
(500 thousandths) will cause accelerated guide wear. If the cam is a short, flat-
lifter design for a small-block Chevy, you may, if the budget is tight, want to
consider Crane's 1.6:1 ratio items. The stock rocker is supposed to be 1.5:1, but
rarely comes higher than about 1.45:1. If the budget is a little above basic
replacement level, then both Crane and COMP have some roller-tipped rockers
that still utilize the stud-mounted ball pivot.

For a little more money, you can get a fully rollerized aluminum race-style
rocker. Other than being able to get them for most applications in a variety of
ratios, these rockers have the advantage of lower friction and the ability to
accommodate ultra-high valve lift.

For the most part, aluminum makes a good rocker material because it has an
inherent internal damping capability. On the debit side is that aluminum
fatigues, so when heavy race-type springs are used, the rockers will need to be
replaced at regular intervals. Stainless steel rockers such as those produced by
Comp Cams and Crower have an almost infinite life.

Another option if you're planning on an up-scale engine is to convert from stud-

mounted rockers to shaft-mounted ones. These are not cheap, but they do
provide the best in valvetrain control.

If you have a better understanding of rocker geometry, you will almost certainly
have a power advantage over a less-informed racer. The principle point of a
rocker is that it steps up the motion delivered to the valve by the lifter. This is
known as the "rocker ratio" and is usually the ratio of the radius of the valve side
of the rocker divided by the radius of the pushrod side. If the centerline of the
points A, B and C as per the drawing on p. 76 all fall on a straight line, the
rocker ratio will remain constant throughout the rise and fall of the lifter. This is
OK, but not necessarily the best situation for maximum output. In any
undervalved engine, and that's pretty much all two-valve engines, greater
output can be had by lifting the intake valves as fast as possible off the seat.
The faster the intake is lifted, the less cam duration is required to make peak
power. A shorter cam with a faster-opening rocker, as we discussed earlier, will
make more torque while still making the peak power of a longer-duration, lower-
lifting valvetrain.

A question often asked is how high a rocker ratio is best. If you consider that the
purpose of a valvetrain is to move valves, not pushrods and lifters, then it
becomes apparent that the higher the ratio, the better within the mechanical
constraints imposed by the materials involved. Current maxed-out valvetrains
are lifting the valves to about an inch and running to about 10,000 rpm. All this
is being done with rockers in the 1.9 to 2.1:1 range.

Stepping up the rocker ratio is often a good way to increase output with no more
than a simple bolt-on mod. Higher-ratio rockers can spread the engine's
required LCA. This means that if the existing cam has too wide an LCA, as is so
often the case, bolting on a set of high-ratio rockers can pay a handsome
dividend. On the other hand, if the LCA was such that the overlap triangle was
optimum, installing a higher-ratio set of rockers can drop output rather than
increase it. My own tests have indicated, within the ratio range of 1.5 to about
1.9:1, that for every 0.1 ratio increase on the intake, the LCA needs to be
spread by 0.75 to 1 degree.

As for the exhaust, we find that it is relatively insensitive to valve acceleration

but is sensitive to duration. For this reason the rocker ratio used on the exhaust
is best kept about 0.1 to 0.2 of a ratio lower than the intake ratio.

As for power increases as a bolt-on deal, for something like a small-block

Chevy or Ford, experience shows you can reasonably expect to see results
similar to or better than shown in the graph below.

Retainers & Keepers

Retainers and keepers (also known as locks) have a simple job, but they sure
take a beating doing it. When selecting retainers, bear in mind they must fit
snugly on the springs with which they are to be used. Also, they need to be as
light as possible, consistent with surviving. Valves are made with various groove
styles, the most common being the square lock and radius lock. The grooves in
the valves and the step in the keepers are not there to act as retention for the
valve and spring assembly. It is the taper in the retainer driving the keeper to a
super-clamping force on the valve stem that, for the most part, holds everything
in place.

Retainers and keepers come in two different angles, these being 7 and 10
degrees. Seven-degree retainer/keeper combinations are the norm and are
used almost universally by the OEM. These work just fine until spring forces
escalate to the levels required to run big valve lifts and very high rpm. Under
such circumstances the keepers literally bind themselves into the retainers
making a teardown really difficult. By going to a 10-degree angle, the clamping
force of the keeper on the valve stem is reduced, but teardown is far easier.

Springs
The most important aspect of a high-speed valvetrain is the spring. It is entirely
true to say that the valvetrain is, at best, only as good as the spring. What we
want from a spring is near infinite fatigue life, low mass and a high delivered
force. Striving for these mechanical virtues produces a long-life spring with a
high, natural vibration frequency, or to give it its technical term, resonant
frequency. The higher the resonant frequency, the less likely the spring is to go
into surge. Without steps to abate it, surge can occur at a number of points as
rpm increases. Basically, surge causes the valvetrain to lose some or all control
of the valve motion. The result is loss of output at whatever rpm it occurs.

Interference fits between two oppositely wound springs, as in a typical dual

spring or a dual spring and flat wound damper, are methods used to damp
spring surge. When selecting a spring, consider the delivered force versus the
weight of the spring. An 80-gram spring that delivers 110 lbs on the seat and
300 over the nose will control the valvetrain far better than one with the same
poundage but weighing in at 110 grams.

Dual and damped high-performance springs have been the valvetrain

designer's number-one means of getting the job done for better than half a
century. By about 20 years ago, most of the development potential of the dual
(or triple) parallel-wound springs had been used. Steel alloys were not going to
get much better without some big breakthrough, and titanium, being stiff and
light, was a viable alternative, but was expensive and difficult to work.

With gains from conventional materials at a near standstill, the other option
spring specialists had was to look at spring design to see if there was a better
alternative to the parallel-wound conventional spring. Turns out there was, and
during the mid 1980s GM began research on the application of a design known
as the "beehive" spring. As its name suggests, this spring is wound in a beehive
form. With each coil getting progressively smaller, this spring has no clear-cut
resonant frequency. As soon as it starts to resonate at a particular frequency,
the resonant frequency changes. Result: Spring surge is, in almost all
applications, reduced to levels bordering on insignificant.

The beauty of the beehive spring is that it uses its delivered force far more
effectively than a conventional parallel-wound spring. It needs far less of its
delivered force to control its own motion, so this leaves more to control the
valvetrain. This means less overall valve-spring loads while delivering more
rpm. Our spin tests on a street roller cam showed an rpm increase from 5,950
to 6,900. This was achieved with a beehive spring (COMP Cams PN 26918)
with 8 lbs less on the seat and 20 less over the nose than its parallel-wound
counterpart. Because of the propensity of hydraulic roller lifters to collapse
easier than their flat counterparts, beehive springs are well-suited to hydraulic
rollers. Reduced loads and better control pay off in terms of added output and
rpm. The two occasions tests were run, both in small-block Fords (302 and
392), showed about a 6hp gain in each, but considering just the change in peak
hp is only a small part of the story. Take a look at the graph showing the before
and after tests of the beehive spring, p. 78. What you see here is a valvetrain
that retains control to significantly higher rpm. The regular spring, in spite of
being stronger, hit valvetrain crash at a shade over 6,000 rpm, but it was
progressively losing control (or collapsing the lifter or a combination of both) at
5,700 rpm. The beehive spring kept it all together up to about 6,600, although
power figures were only recorded to 6,400. At 6,000 rpm the beehive's ability to
deliver superior control netted an increase of some 65 hp.

Valves and Mass

For the type of valvetrains we are looking at, the mass of the valve is as
significant as that of the spring/retainer combination. From the tech point of view
there are no dark issues to comprehend. The golden rule is the lighter the
better. With lighter valves the amount of acceleration imparted to the valve can
be increased either by a more aggressive cam profile or a higher lift rocker. The
faster the intake can be opened and closed the greater the engine's output
potential. For the exhaust, things are somewhat different in as much as a fast-
opening exhaust valve action is not required. Indeed, it is possible to open the
exhaust valve too fast and actually reduce output. Costwise, this can actually
play into our hands.

Most of us use stainless valves because they are relatively inexpensive. Top-of-
the-line lightweight valves are made of titanium, and they cost something
bordering an arm and a leg. Fortunately, Ferrea makes a stainless valve that is
better than a halfway house at less than a halfway house price. These are their
hollow-stem valves. The nearby Spintron tests show where each type of valve
lies in the grand scheme of things.

Cost is an ever-present barrier, but there are ways to maximize a valvetrain's

ability to run the best rpm possible per valve dollar spent. By juggling valve
types between intake and exhaust, we can make the most of our valve budget
dollars. Remember, only the intake has to be opened fast. Because the exhaust
valve is smaller and consequently lighter and is usually run with a lower-lift
rocker, we find that we can use a hollow-stem intake and a less expensive
solid-stem exhaust. The same move can be applied if you can go upscale on
cost. A combination of a titanium intake with a hollow-stem stainless exhaust
works just about as well as having both valves of titanium. Not only is this less
costly, but for a long distance engine it is actually more durable.

Next Month...
If you absorbed all this, you should be well along the road to being a cam guru.
What we have not touched on, however, is physically timing-in cams and the
consequences of advancing and retarding the cam. This will also be a vital part
of your cam and valvetrain education, but it warrants a feature all its own.
Check PHR next month for the rest of the story.
 38/39

Spring Surge: What Is It?

Spring surge is when the spring can no longer fully control its own mass. This
situation is caused by the spring being excited by a force that coincides with the
spring's natural vibration frequency. Imagine a hammer striking the end of a
spring. The impact (not unlike that of a valvetrain about to open a valve) will
take time (be it very short) to travel down the spring. The effect of the impact is
to close up the space of the top coil and the one immediately below it. This
closing of the coils passes down the length of the spring until it reaches the
bottom coil. There it is reflected and returns to the top. The point to note is that
as it reaches the spring seat, the poundage the spring delivers is substantially
reduced. In severe cases the lower coil of the spring can actually jump off the
spring seat. When a spring experiences this sort of internal motion, it is in no
way able to control the valvetrain.
 39/39

Take The Easy Way Out

Stumped by Vizard's verbosity? Call up COMP Cams and ask for the
CamQuest6 cam-selection software--it costs 10 bucks. It works on any PC with
Windows 95 or newer. It's just like the award-winning DynoSim engine
simulation software, only it's a lot cheaper. After installing the program, just fill in
the prompts for your engine specs on the left side of the screen. You'll be asked
your engine type, induction, engine size, planned useage, cylinder head type,
exhaust type and a few other questions. After a few nano-seconds, a list of
camshaft profiles pops up on the right side. As you scroll through the list of
computer-selected cams, the dyno graph on the lower left of your screen
changes to reflect the power output of that cam combination. The best part
about CamQuest6 is that the program gives you exact COMP Cams part
numbers. Just pick the power curve you want, dial 800-999-0853, and give 'em
the part number listed on the CamQuest6 screen. You can even tell them you
heard about CamQuest6 from PHR and they'll give you your 10 bucks back on
your cam order. And just how accurate is CamQuest6? We plugged in the
specs for our smog-legal 383 small-block from Project g/28, and got a power
curve that looked so close to our real dyno numbers that it nearly scared us.--
Johnny Hunkins

SOURCES

Comp Cams
Memphis, TN 38118
800-999-0853
http://www.compcams.com

Ferrea Racing Components

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
888-733-2505
http://www.ferrea.com

Crower Cams & Equipment

Chula Vista, CA 91911-5899
(619) 422-1191